DOCSLIB.ORG

The Creation of the Universe and the Monopole String of Paul Dirac for the Magnetic Monopoles of T’Hooft-Polyakov

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Creation of the Universe and the Monopole String of Paul Dirac for the Magnetic Monopoles of T’Hooft-Polyakov The Creation of the Universe and the Monopole String of Paul Dirac for the Magnetic Monopoles of t’Hooft-Polyakov Tony Bermanseder Abstract The Dirac quantization condition and its relationship to the electromagnetic finestructure constant alpha is derived from the initial boundary conditions of the Quantum Big Bang Singularity (QBBS). The QBBS is shown to form a 2/11-dimensional mirror membrane as a 1- dimensional Dirac string relating timespace of a string-membrane epoch preceding the QBBS to the spacetime following the creation event. The Dirac monopole then transforms as a point particle into a space extended elementary particle known as the classical electron and is electro charge coupled as an electropole to the magneto charge of a magnetopole. The electron as a point particle of QFT and QED so becomes the monopolar form of the Dirac monopole as the Dirac electron, but coupled to the elementary quantum geometric templates of the scalar Higgs boson with a dark matter particle defined as a RMP or Restmass Photon. The space occupying classical electron is shown to oscillate on the fermi scale of the nuclear interactions of colour charge asymptotic gluon-quark confinement, with the ground state for the electron defining the wormhole singularity of the QBBS in spacetime as the fifth transformation of superstring classes (heterotic class 64) from the timespace era. The Dirac string so manifests as a membrane-mirror for a 4-dimensional spacetime embedded within a 5-dimensional spacetime and descriptive for a 3-dimensional surface embedded as volumar within a higher dimensional cosmology, described in the properties of a Möbian-Klein Bottle geometric connectivity for a one-sided manifold becoming two-sided in the original form of the Dirac string as a one-dimensional mathematical singularity mirroring itself in the monopolar string self-duality of a multidimensional holographic cosmology. Note: This page is added by viXra Admin – See requirements/instructions on the submission form. Video link: https://youtu.be/zOVag2pcApo https://www.bitchute.com/video/mMVoAb4t9xtg/ The Creation of the Universe and the Monopole String of Paul Dirac for the Magnetic Monopoles of t’Hooft-Polyakov Abstract: The Dirac quantization condition and its relationship to the electromagnetic finestructure constant alpha is derived from the initial boundary conditions of the Quantum Big Bang Singularity (QBBS). The QBBS is shown to form a 2/11-dimensional mirror membrane as a 1-dimensional Dirac string relating timespace of a string-membrane epoch preceding the QBBS to the spacetime following the creation event. The Dirac monopole then transforms as a point particle into a space extended elementary particle known as the classical electron and is electro charge coupled as an electropole to the magneto charge of a magnetopole. The electron as a point particle of QFT and QED so becomes the monopolar form of the Dirac monopole as the Dirac electron, but coupled to the elementary quantum geometric templates of the scalar Higgs boson with a dark matter particle defined as a RMP or Restmass Photon. The space occupying classical electron is shown to oscillate on the fermi scale of the nuclear interactions of colour charge asymptotic gluon-quark confinement, with the ground state for the electron defining the wormhole singularity of the QBBS in spacetime as the fifth transformation of superstring classes (heterotic class 64) from the timespace era. The Dirac string so manifests as a membrane-mirror for a 4- dimensional spacetime embedded within a 5-dimensional spacetime and descriptive for a 3-dimensional surface embedded as volumar within a higher dimensional cosmology, described in the properties of a Möbian-Klein Bottle geometric connectivity for a one-sided manifold becoming two-sided in the original form of the Dirac string as a one-dimensional mathematical singularity mirroring itself in the monopolar string self-duality of a multidimensional holographic cosmology . The natural stability of the proton and the absence of an original supersymmetry between matter and antimatter is shown to be the result of the non-existence of antimatter in the primordial universe and the coupling of the Higgs boson to the RMP of spin -1 and energy 14.03 TeV*. Primordial neutron decay becomes the transformation of a RMP boson in the form of an ylemic dineutron into two lefthanded neutrons quantum spin coupled to a graviphoton as the scalar Higgs bosonic blueprint of the wave- quarkian quantum geometry. Particular initial boundary conditions for the QBBS, defined as the Dirac magnetic monopole indicate the energy regime for the Higgs Boson as being bounded in a subatomic displacement scale from 0.000014-0.0028 fermi. This displacement scale forms a natural boundary for the mesonic scale for the strong nuclear interaction and resolves the discrepancy in the mean lifetime for beta minus decay in showing that the excess of neutrons at the Higgs energy with RMP-dark matter excess is 126.95/125.78=1.0093 and becomes balanced by a deficit of neutrons at the Higgs energy with RMP -dark matter deficit in 122.49/123.57=0.9913 and time differences of 10.28 and 9.92 seconds* for a mean neutron lifetime of 880.14 s* respectively. The thermodynamic evolution of the universe is shown to relate a general evolution of neutron stars with specific nuclear densities with respect to the cosmic radiation background to the Hawking properties of black holes as a background energy matrix originating from the distribution of a baryonic mass seedling and its coupling to the QBBS parameters. The Hawking-Gamow Temperature Unification for classical and quantum gravitation is so derived as the temperature ratio: 3 2 2 3 2 THawking/Tylem = 1 = hcRe /2Gomc Rylem RHawking = Re /nucleon.Rylem RHawking 18 with nucleon = plancke . Hakigs io lak holes ae sho to pla a deisie ole i the uiesal osolog, as the modulate the quantum gravitational universe of the creation event with the classical gravitation of the spacetime geometry. In particular the micro black holes form the energy centers within encompassing vortices of potential energy modelled on the Jeans length applied to the general temperature evolution of the universe and inclusive of dark matter haloes around galaxies deriving from the original intersection of the higher dimensional inflaton superluminal light path with the lower dimensional light path of the instanton. The diffiulties i easuig Netos gaitatioal ostat ae foud to e directly related to the measured variation in the electromagnetic finestructure constant alpha e as the polar orientation of the Dia stig of the QBB“ ad as a distiutio of t Hooft-Polyakov monopoles in the Schwarzschild metric at the GUT unification energy scale from 2.7x1016 GeV* to 8.1x1017 GeV*. Introduction Paul A.M. Dirac said in his 1931 paper addressing his work on the quantization of electric charge in connection with the magnetic charge of a magnetic monopole: The theo leads to a oetio, ael, [eg0 = hc/4], between the quantum of magnetic pole and the electronic charge. It is rather disappointing to find this reciprocity between electricity and magnetism, instead of a purely electronic quantum condition such as [hc/2e2]. In his 1948 paper Dirac emphasized his belief in magnetic monopoles: The uatizatio of eletiit is oe of the ost fudaetal ad stikig featues of atoi phsis, and there seems to be no explanation for it apart from the theory of poles. This provides some grounds for elieig i the eistee of these poles. Then in 1978, Dirac expressed his disappointment as to the apparent unreality of magnetic monopoles and the physical importance of the electromagnetic finestructure constant alpha: …[the theo]...did not lead to any value for this number value [-1 ≈ 137], and, for that reason, my aguet seeed to e a failue ad I as disappoited ith it. The pole of eplaiig this ue hc/2e2 is still completely unsolved. Nearly 50 years have passed since then. I think it is perhaps the most fundamental unsolved problem of physics at the present time, and I doubt very much whether any really big progress will be made in understanding the fundamentals of phsis util it is soled. Ref: Dirac, P.A.M. (September 1931). "Quantized Singularities in the Electromagnetic Field. Poeedigs. 133 (821): 60–72.Bibcode:1931RSPSA.133...60D. doi:10.1098/rspa.1931.0130. 1. Dirac PAM. Quantized singularities in the electromagnetic field. Proc R Soc Lond A. 1931; 133: 60-72. 2. Dirac PAM. The theory of magnetic poles. Phys Rev. 1948; 74: 817-830. 3. Dirac PAM. The monopole concept. Int J Theor Phys. 1978; 17: 235–247. 4. https://arxiv.org/pdf/1810.13403.pdf The Creation in a Quantum Big Bang in Spacetime from Timespace The origin and nature of the universe has been a question of inquiry since the beginnings of sentient life forms experiencing themselves in a variety of forms and degrees of being self-aware. Many cosmological models have and are being constructed from the beginnings of speech and sound and geometric symbolism to words and written record keeping in parchments, scrolls, paper, manuscripts, and the digitalization of libraries. The Big Bang model for the creation of the universe In the journey through the history of planet earth in time, the models created and composed to explain this history and the encompassing history of the universe itself, have attained a nexus point of comprehension and understanding to enable the planetary civilization on earth to collectivize and universally share its information basis with the overall universe. A universal civilization potential can then be realised, by substituting an older historical timeframe of Universal Political Correctness by the Uniphyscon or Universal Physicalized Consciousness and as a synonym for a new historical timeframe and timespace as the generator of spacetime.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Messenger
    THE MESSENGER No. 35-March 1984 Report on the First ESO-CERN Symposium on "Large Scale Structure of the Universe, Cosmology and Fundamental Physics" G. Setti, ESO The first ESO-CERN Symposium was held at CERN, deuterium, were produced when the age of the Universe was Geneva, from 21 st to 25th November 1983 and was attended only about 100 seconds, the temperature about one billion by approximately 200 participants. The discussions concen­ degrees and the density of the order of the density of water, in trated on the general field of Cosmology, where the progress a phase that lasted about 8 minutes. At that moment the made in the past twenty years, both in elementary particles Universe was essentially a gaseous mixture composed of and astronomy, has shown that these two fields of basic protons, neutrons, electrons, positrons, neutrinos and anti­ research are merging toward a new and fundamental under­ neutrinos (and perhaps some other exotic particles, such as standing of the laws that govern our Universe. A detailed photinos) immersed in a heat bath of photons. The equilibrium account is contained in the Proceedings of the Symposium between these components is maintained by the weak which will be available in a few months. interaction, one of the four fundamental forces wh ich are The meeting was started with an introductory lecture by believed to govern all natural phenomena.* The weak force D. W. Sciama (Oxford and Trieste) who highlighted the numer­ together with the "hot big-bang" model allows definite predic­ ous and fundamental problems the understanding of which tions about the abundances of primordial elements.
    [Show full text]
  • Units and Magnitudes (Lecture Notes)
    physics 8.701 topic 2 Frank Wilczek Units and Magnitudes (lecture notes) This lecture has two parts. The first part is mainly a practical guide to the measurement units that dominate the particle physics literature, and culture. The second part is a quasi-philosophical discussion of deep issues around unit systems, including a comparison of atomic, particle ("strong") and Planck units. For a more extended, profound treatment of the second part issues, see arxiv.org/pdf/0708.4361v1.pdf . Because special relativity and quantum mechanics permeate modern particle physics, it is useful to employ units so that c = ħ = 1. In other words, we report velocities as multiples the speed of light c, and actions (or equivalently angular momenta) as multiples of the rationalized Planck's constant ħ, which is the original Planck constant h divided by 2π. 27 August 2013 physics 8.701 topic 2 Frank Wilczek In classical physics one usually keeps separate units for mass, length and time. I invite you to think about why! (I'll give you my take on it later.) To bring out the "dimensional" features of particle physics units without excess baggage, it is helpful to keep track of powers of mass M, length L, and time T without regard to magnitudes, in the form When these are both set equal to 1, the M, L, T system collapses to just one independent dimension. So we can - and usually do - consider everything as having the units of some power of mass. Thus for energy we have while for momentum 27 August 2013 physics 8.701 topic 2 Frank Wilczek and for length so that energy and momentum have the units of mass, while length has the units of inverse mass.
    [Show full text]
  • The Mystery of Gravitation and the Elementary Graviton Loop Tony Bermanseder
    The Mystery of Gravitation and the Elementary Graviton Loop Tony Bermanseder [email protected] This message shall address the mystery of gravitation and will prove to be a pertinent cornerstone for terrestrial scientists, who are searching for the unification physics in regards to their cosmologies. This message so requires familiarity with technical nomenclature, but I shall attempt to simplify sufficiently for all interested parties to follow the outlines. 1. Classically metric Newtonian-Einsteinian Gravitation and the Barycentre! 2. Quantum Gravitation and the Alpha-Force - Why two mass-charges attract each other! 3. Gauge-Vortex Gravitons in Modular String-Duality! 4. The Positronium Exemplar! 1. Classically metric Newtonian-Einsteinian Gravitation and the Barycentre! Most of you are know of gravity as the long-range force {F G}, given by Isaac Newton as the interaction between two masses {m 1,2 }, separated by a distance R and in the formula: 2 {F G =G.m 1.m 2/R } and where G is Newton's Gravitational Constant, presently measured as -11 -10 about 6.674x10 G-units and maximized in Planck- or string units as G o=1.111..x10 G-units. The masses m 1,2 are then used as 'point-masses', meaning that the mass of an object can be thought of as being centrally 'concentrated' as a 'centre of mass' and/or as a 'centre of gravity'. 24 For example, the mass of the earth is about m 1=6x10 kg and the mass of the sun is about 30 m2=2x10 kg and so as 'point-masses' the earth and the sun orbit or revolve about each other with a centre of mass or BARYCENTRE within the sun, but displaced towards the line connecting the two bodies.
    [Show full text]
  • Extending Symmetries of the Standard Model Towards Grand Unification
    Master research Extending Symmetries of the Standard Model towards Grand Unification Anno Touwen Supervisor prof. dr. Dani¨el Boer August 3, 2018 Abstract In this master thesis the spacetime, global and gauge symmetries of the Standard Model are reviewed. These symmetries are used as a basis for finding possible extensions of this successful model, such as the two Higgs doublet model and Left-Right model. Methods of finding subgroups and the slitting up of representations are discussed based on Dynkin diagrams. These methods are applied to analyse the subgroups of the exceptional group E6 as candidates for Grand Unified 3 Theory groups. In this study SU(5), SO(10) and SU(3) and SU(4)×SU(2)×SU(2) are most important. A phenomenological comparison between these models is given focussed on the different types of leptoquarks that could be responsible for the not yet observed proton decay. Contents 1 Introduction 3 2 Symmetry groups and Gauge theories 5 2.1 Group theory . .5 2.2 Unitary and Special Unitary groups . .8 2.3 Orthogonal and Special Orthogonal groups . 10 2.4 Gauge theories and fields . 11 2.5 Spacetime symmetries . 13 2.6 C, P and T transformations . 14 3 The Standard Model 16 3.1 The Electroweak interaction . 16 3.2 The Strong interaction . 19 3.3 Fermion content . 19 3.4 Eigenstates and the CKM-matrix . 22 3.5 Global symmetries . 23 4 Beyond the Standard Model 28 4.1 Two Higgs doublet model . 28 4.2 Left-Right models . 34 5 A further study of Lie Groups and Algebras 37 5.1 Root systems .
    [Show full text]
  • Download Full-Text
    International Journal of Theoretical and Mathematical Physics 2021, 11(1): 29-59 DOI: 10.5923/j.ijtmp.20211101.03 Measurement Quantization Describes the Physical Constants Jody A. Geiger 1Department of Research, Informativity Institute, Chicago, IL, USA Abstract It has been a long-standing goal in physics to present a physical model that may be used to describe and correlate the physical constants. We demonstrate, this is achieved by describing phenomena in terms of Planck Units and introducing a new concept, counts of Planck Units. Thus, we express the existing laws of classical mechanics in terms of units and counts of units to demonstrate that the physical constants may be expressed using only these terms. But this is not just a nomenclature substitution. With this approach we demonstrate that the constants and the laws of nature may be described with just the count terms or just the dimensional unit terms. Moreover, we demonstrate that there are three frames of reference important to observation. And with these principles we resolve the relation of the physical constants. And we resolve the SI values for the physical constants. Notably, we resolve the relation between gravitation and electromagnetism. Keywords Measurement Quantization, Physical Constants, Unification, Fine Structure Constant, Electric Constant, Magnetic Constant, Planck’s Constant, Gravitational Constant, Elementary Charge ground state orbital a0 and mass of an electron me – both 1. Introduction measures from the 2018 CODATA – we resolve fundamental length l . And we continue with the resolution of We present expressions, their calculation and the f the gravitational constant G, Planck’s reduced constant ħ corresponding CODATA [1,2] values in Table 1.
    [Show full text]
  • The Monopolar Quantum Relativistic Electron an Extension of the Standard Model and Quantum Field Theory
    The Monopolar Quantum Relativistic Electron An extension of the standard model and quantum field theory http://www.feynmanlectures.caltech.edu/II_28.html Abstract: Despite the experimental success of the quantum theory and the extension of classical physics in quantum field theory and relativity in special and general application; a synthesis between the classical approach based on Euclidean and Riemann geometries with that of 'modern' theoretical physics based on statistical energy and frequency distributions remains to be a field of active research for the global theoretical and experimental physics community. In this paper a particular attempt for unification shall be indicated in the proposal of a third kind of relativity in a geometric form of quantum relativity, which utilizes the string modular duality of a higher dimensional energy spectrum based on a physics of wormholes directly related to a cosmogony preceding the cosmologies of the thermodynamic universe from inflaton to instanton. In this way, the quantum theory of the microcosm of the outer and inner atom becomes subject to conformal transformations to and from the instanton of a quantum big bang or qbb and therefore enabling a description of the macrocosm of general relativity in terms of the modular T-duality of 11-dimensional supermembrane theory and so incorporating quantum gravity as a geometrical effect of energy transformations at the wormhole scale. Using the linked Feynman lecture at Caltech as a background for the quantum relative approach; this paper shall focus on the way the classical electron with a stipulated electromagnetic mass as a function of its spacial extent exposes the difficulty encountered by quantum field theories to model nature as mathematical point-particles without spacial extent.
    [Show full text]
  • Finding the Radiation from the Big Bang
    Finding The Radiation from the Big Bang P. J. E. Peebles and R. B. Partridge January 9, 2007 4. Preface 6. Chapter 1. Introduction 13. Chapter 2. A guide to cosmology 14. The expanding universe 19. The thermal cosmic microwave background radiation 21. What is the universe made of? 26. Chapter 3. Origins of the Cosmology of 1960 27. Nucleosynthesis in a hot big bang 32. Nucleosynthesis in alternative cosmologies 36. Thermal radiation from a bouncing universe 37. Detecting the cosmic microwave background radiation 44. Cosmology in 1960 52. Chapter 4. Cosmology in the 1960s 53. David Hogg: Early Low-Noise and Related Studies at Bell Lab- oratories, Holmdel, N.J. 57. Nick Woolf: Conversations with Dicke 59. George Field: Cyanogen and the CMBR 62. Pat Thaddeus 63. Don Osterbrock: The Helium Content of the Universe 70. Igor Novikov: Cosmology in the Soviet Union in the 1960s 78. Andrei Doroshkevich: Cosmology in the Sixties 1 80. Rashid Sunyaev 81. Arno Penzias: Encountering Cosmology 95. Bob Wilson: Two Astronomical Discoveries 114. Bernard F. Burke: Radio astronomy from first contacts to the CMBR 122. Kenneth C. Turner: Spreading the Word — or How the News Went From Princeton to Holmdel 123. Jim Peebles: How I Learned Physical Cosmology 136. David T. Wilkinson: Measuring the Cosmic Microwave Back- ground Radiation 144. Peter Roll: Recollections of the Second Measurement of the CMBR at Princeton University in 1965 153. Bob Wagoner: An Initial Impact of the CMBR on Nucleosyn- thesis in Big and Little Bangs 157. Martin Rees: Advances in Cosmology and Relativistic Astro- physics 163.
    [Show full text]
  • Should Physical Laws Be Unit-Invariant?
    Should physical laws be unit-invariant? 1. Introduction In a paper published in this journal in 2015, Sally Riordan reviews a recent debate about whether fundamental constants are really “constant”, or whether they may change over cosmological timescales. Her context is the impending redefinition of the kilogram and other units in terms of fundamental constants – a practice which is seen as more “objective” than defining units in terms of human artefacts. She focusses on one particular constant, the fine structure constant (α), for which some evidence of such a variation has been reported. Although α is not one of the fundamental constants involved in the proposed redefinitions, it is linked to some which are, so that there is a clear cause for concern. One of the authors she references is Michael Duff, who presents an argument supporting his assertion that dimensionless constants are more fundamental than dimensioned ones; this argument employs various systems of so-called “natural units”. [see Riordan (2015); Duff (2004)] An interesting feature of this discussion is that not only Riordan herself, but all the papers she cites, use a formula for α that is valid only in certain systems of units, and would not feature in a modern physics textbook. This violates another aspect of objectivity – namely, the idea that our physical laws should be expressed in such a way that they are independent of the particular units we choose to use; they should be unit-invariant. In this paper I investigate the place of unit-invariance in the history of physics, together with its converse, unit-dependence, which we will find is a common feature of some branches of physics, despite the fact that, as I will show in an analysis of Duff’s argument, unit-dependent formulae can lead to erroneous conclusions.
    [Show full text]
  • Fundamental Constants and Units and the Search for Temporal Variations
    Lecture Notes for the Schladming Winter School "Masses and Constants" 2010. Published in Nucl. Phys. B (Proc. Suppl.) 203-204, 18 (2010) 1 Fundamental constants and units and the search for temporal variations Ekkehard Peika aPhysikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt, Bundesallee 100, 38116 Braunschweig, Germany This article reviews two aspects of the present research on fundamental constants: their use in a universal and precisely realizable system of units for metrology and the search for a conceivable temporal drift of the constants that may open an experimental window to new physics. 1. INTRODUCTION mainly focus on two examples: the unit of mass that is presently realized via an artefact that shall These lectures attempt to cover two active top- be replaced by a quantum definition based on fun- ics of research in the field of the fundamental con- damental constants and the unit of time, which stants whose motivations may seem to be discon- is exceptional in the accuracy to which time and nected or even opposed. On one hand there is a frequencies can be measured with atomic clocks. successful program in metrology to link the real- The second part will give a brief motivation for ization of the base units as closely as possible to the search for variations of constants, will re- the values of fundamental constants like the speed view some observations in geophysics and in as- of light c, the elementary charge e etc., because trophysics and will finally describe laboratory ex- such an approach promises to provide a univer- periments that make use of a new generation of sal and precise system for all measurements of highly precise atomic clocks.
    [Show full text]
  • A Mathematical Appendix
    381 A Mathematical Appendix A.1 Selected Formulae “Don’t worry about your difficulties in mathematics; I can assure you that mine are still greater.” Albert Einstein The solution of physics problems often involves mathemat- ics. In most cases nature is not so kind as to allow a precise mathematical treatment. Many times approximations are not only rather convenient but also necessary, because the gen- eral solution of specific problems can be very demanding and sometimes even impossible. In addition to these approximations, which often involve power series, where only the leading terms are relevant, ba- sic knowledge of calculus and statistics is required. In the following the most frequently used mathematical aids shall be briefly presented. 1. Power Series Binomial expansion: binomial expansion (1 ± x)m = m(m − 1) m(m − 1)(m − 2) 1 ± mx + x2 ± x3 +··· 2! 3! m(m − 1) ···(m − n + 1) + (±1)n xn +··· . n! For integer positive m this series is finite. The coefficients are binomial coefficients m(m − 1) ···(m − n + 1) m = . n! n If m is not a positive integer, the series is infinite and con- vergent for |x| < 1. This expansion often provides a simpli- fication of otherwise complicated expressions. 382 A Mathematical Appendix A few examples for most commonly used binomial ex- pansions: examples 1 1 1 5 (1 ± x)1/2 = 1 ± x − x2 ± x3 − x4 ±··· , for binomial expansions 2 8 16 128 − 1 3 5 35 (1 ± x) 1/2 = 1 ∓ x + x2 ∓ x3 + x4 ∓··· , 2 8 16 128 − (1 ± x) 1 = 1 ∓ x + x2 ∓ x3 + x4 ∓··· , (1 ± x)4 = 1 ± 4x + 6x2 ± 4x3 + x4 finite .
    [Show full text]
  • Anomaly and Cobordism Constraints Beyond the Standard Model
    Anomaly and Cobordism Constraints Beyond the Standard Model: Topological Force Juven Wang Center of Mathematical Sciences and Applications, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138, USA Abstract Standard lore uses perturbative local anomalies to check the kinematic consistency of gauge theories coupled to chiral fermions, such as the Standard Models (SM) of particle physics. In this work, based on a systematic cobordism classification, we examine the constraints from invertible quantum anomalies (including all perturbative local anomalies and all nonperturbative global anomalies) for SM and chiral gauge theories. We also clarify the different uses of these anomalies: including (1) anomaly cancellations of dynamical gauge fields, (2) ’t Hooft anomaly matching conditions of background fields of global symmetries. We apply several 4d anomaly constraints of Z16, Z4, and Z2 classes, beyond the familiar Feynman-graph perturbative Z class local anomalies. As an application, for SU(3)×SU(2)×U(1) Zq SM (with q = 1; 2; 3; 6) and SU(5) Grand Unification with 15n chiral Weyl fermions and with a discrete baryon minus lepton number X = 5(B L) 4Y preserved, we discover a new hidden gapped sector previously unknown to the SM and− Georgi-Glashow− model. The gapped sector at low energy contains either (1) 4d non-invertible topological quantum field theory (TQFT, above the energy gap with heavy fractionalized anyon excitations from 1d particle worldline and 2d string worldsheet, inaccessible directly from Dirac or Majorana mass gap of the 16th Weyl fermions [i.e., right-handed neutrinos], but accessible via a topological quantum phase transition), or (2) 5d invertible TQFT in extra dimensions.
    [Show full text]
  • Ʌ-Units and Ʌ-Mega Quantum of Action in Their Historical Context
    Ʌ-Units and Ʌ-Mega Quantum of action in their historical context Ludwik Kostro, ATENEUM ‒ University of Higher Education, Gdańsk, prof. emeritus at Gdańsk University, Poland, [email protected] Abstract: In Physics we are using conventional units, e.g. nowadays the SI system. Some physicists, among them G. J. Stoney, M. Planck, and Ch. Kittel have introduced into physics the so-called “Natural Units” determi- ned by universal constants. Since several years I am trying to introduce a set of natural units determined by the three Einstein’s constants c, κ = and Ʌ. Since long time in Relativistic Cosmology there are already used some units determined by c, κ and Ʌ: the Ʌ-force = ; Ʌ-pressure of the physical Ʌ Ʌ Ʌ vacuum P = ; Ʌ-mass density ρ = and Ʌ- energy density ρ c = . Ʌ Ʌ Ʌ In my paper (Kostro 2018) there was published the whole list of Ʌ-units. I call them Ʌ- units because they are determined, for the first time, also by the cosmological constant. Among them there are the Mega Units (perhaps Mega Quanta): of Ʌ-Mass M = , of Ʌ-Energy E = ; the Mega Ʌ Ʌ½ Ʌ Ʌ½ Quantum of Ʌ-Action H = . Since some of Ʌ-units can be interpreted Ʌ Ʌ as de Broglie like Ʌ-period T = , Ʌ-frequency v = cɅ½ , Ʌ-ener- Ʌ Ʌ½ Ʌ Ʌ gy EɅ =HɅvɅ and Ʌ-wave length λɅ = and because between the all Ʌ universal constants there ate correlations and interconnections we can ask the question whether in the Nature there are perhaps Ʌ-mega waves, Ʌ- mega fluctuations.
    [Show full text]